LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REFORM.

Evening Star, Issue 8613, 5 September 1891, Page 2 (Supplement)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REFORM.

WELLINGTON, September 5. In Committee*last night on the Council Reform Bill, on danse 2• (appointment of members), the Premier moved that the age of future members should be twenty-one years, instead of thirty-five.—Agreed to. On danse 3 (members to hold office for ten years), the Premier moved to substitute seven years. The Hon. W. Rolleston objected, and said if Councillors were appointed every seven years it wonld put too mnch power in the hands of the Government of the day. The Premier replied that seven years was a long time in the history of a colony, and a man who had been seven years in the Legislative Conndl would want renewing. The Hon. W. Roixeston said if that were the case the latter portion of the clause, wbieh provided that every such person. may from time to time be reappointed, should be struck out. He would rest the feeling of the Committee by moving that no member of the Legislative Council be reappointed unless during his terUi he had held office as a Minister of the Crown. If a provision of this kind were not inserted the Council would become altogether subservient to the Ministry for the time being. Mr Blake opposed Mr fiallsnoe’s proposal. He was convinced that the Legialative Council was necessary, and should support the ten years’ term. Captain Russell was indifferent whether the term was ten or seven years, bnt he had long been of opinion that some limit should be put to the duration of time for which Councillors should be appointed. He could not agree with Mr Rolleston that there should be no reappointments, but thonght, on the contrary, a man who proved a good and efficient Councillor should be reappointed. Mr O’Conor moved that the Chairman leave the chair. His reason for doing so was that the Bill now before the Committee did not represent the feeling of the people in the colony. He spoke strongly against the Bill. Sir G. Grey said the character of the Legislative Council was altogether changed from what it was intended to be. That Chamber had now become an hereditary one, and a practice had grown up by which sons of deceased persons obtained seats in the Council, which he held was a great abuse and a great wrong. He complained strongly of the rejection of a measure intended for the benefit of the people by that Council, and said they weie really dominated by powerful companies, some of whose officers and managers possessed seats in the Council. The present Bill was no reform whatever, bat it wonld be their own fault if the House did not alter that state of things. He did not agree with the proposal that the Chairman should leave the chair, as that wonld put it out of their power to effect any reform at all, and now was their opportunity. He asked what the House had done that their measure should be treated with scorn by the Council, They should take some steps to relieve themselves from this incubus, aud it was in the power of the House to say that after a certain time the Legislative Council should cease to exist.

Mr Bcckland said Sir G. Grey had just delivered one of bis annual speeches against the Legislative Connell. It was no nse boating around in that direction, as the Legislative Council was there, and they could not remove it. The only thing that could possibly induce him (Mr Bnckland) to support the Premier would be if that hon. gentlemen called Sir G. Grey to the Upper House, and no doubt he would in time become a good Conservative. He supported the Bill, but wfts in favor of an elective 'Upper House. He should not on that account abnse the present Councillors, Why, Sir G. Grey himself was as much responsible for those Councillors being there as anybody else. He was very glad that the Council existed, as it was one of the bulwarks of their liberty, and bad proved its usefulness on many occasions, Mr O’Conor withdrew bis motion.

The Hon. T. Fergus agreed with Mr Buckland that man} Liberal members in the House supported measures with the certain hope that the Legislative Council would reject them. His opinion was that the Legislative Council conducted its business as well and probably better than the House.

The Premier’s motion to strike out the word “ ten ” was carried on the voices. Sir G. Grey moved—“ That members of the Council should only bold office for three years, He did so in order that Legislative Councillors should have the same term of office as members of the House of Representatives.

Mr Fish was surprised at Sir G. Grey moving such an amendment, as it was perfectly certain the Council would reject it, and they would then have no reform at all.

Mr Bees supported Sir G. Grey's amendment. He thought the Council was not entitled to a longer term of t ffico than the House. He admitted the Legislative Council bad behaved honorably in passing this Bill for their own reform, bat they should have made it apply to themselves as well as those to be appointed in the future. Sir 6. Grey’s amendment was lost by 39 to 11. Sir G. Gbey then moved to insert “ five years” instead of “seven, —Lost by 33 to 16, and “ seven ” carried on the voices. Sir G. Gbey moved that the Council should be elective, but the Chairman ruled it out of order in that Bill; also an amendment that no members should be appointed to the Council unless after a resolution of the whole House.

Mr Thompson (Auckland) moved an amendment to the effect that this Act should apply to the last seven appointments made to the Council—viz, to those appointed since the Ist January, 1891. Agreed to on the voices.

Captain Russell thought the amendment just passed made the Bill retrospective, and would jeopardise it. He was anx ous that the Bill should pass, but thought the Committee should reconsider its action before finally passing the clause. The Premier said Mr Thompson had stated that he had been informed by a member of the late Ministry that the gentlemen recently appointed had given a pledge to make this Act apply to their own appointments. If it were found that those gentlemen did not give such a pledge, this amend ment should not have effect; but it would be a matter for a conference to consider, Mr Bees asked Captain Russell to say whether such a pledge had been given.

Mr T. Thompson said it had been stated at a caucus of the lato Government party that such a pledge had been given. Sir John Hall said he was present at the caucus, but had no recollection of any such statement being made. Mr T. Mackenzie corroborated Sir John Hall’s statement.

Mr R. Thompson, on being appealed to by Mr T. Thompson, said his impression was that the late Premier had stated positively that the gentlemen appointed bad given a pledge that they would support a reform of the Council applying to themselves. The clause as amended was passed. On clause 7 (appointment of Speaker) the Premier thought that the right of appointing the Speaker should be vested in the Grown instead of in the Connell itself, as provided by the Bill. He moved, therefore, that clause 7 be struck out.

Sir J. Hall said no good reasons bad been shown why the Legislative Conncil should be deprived of the right of appointing their Speaker. No inducement whatever would be now held out to members of that body to prove by their usefulness that they might aspire to an office of this kind. He hoped the Committee would pass the danse as it stood. The Pbemibb said that the Crown had exercised this power for many years, and he saw no reason why it should be altered now.

After further discussion the clause was struck out.

Mr Fish moved a new clause to the effect that a Legislative Councillor, who voluntarily resigns his seat in that Chamber, shall be entitled to retain the title of “honorable”; and also a free railway pass, and to have access to the parliunentary library. . Considerable discussion ensued, several members objecting to the title of “honorable ” being retained. Mr Fish consented to strike out this por*

tion of the danse, end the amended clause was then carried by 22 to 20. The Bill was reported with amendments, which were agreed to. The Bill was then road a third timo by 40 to 12. On the motion that the Ml do past, . Mr Beeves (Inangahna) read, from a copy' of the 1 New Zealand Herald 1 of January last, a report of a canons held by the late Government party, in which it was stated that the six gentlemen recently appointed tothe Legislative Conocll had given a pledge * to the Government that they wonld consent to the Legislative Council Reform Bill having application to their own appointments.

Mr Mackenzie (Clntha) said that was nopromise whatever. A report of that meeting mfgi't have been supplied to the newspaper by Mr Reeves himself, or by th» member for Auckland. The.Blll then passed on the voices.